Marcel and Ricoeur’s Understanding of Being as Incarnate Existence: Against the Possible Contemporary Return of the Mind-body Dualism

Anné Verhoef; Zander Janse van Rensburg

doi:10.25159/2413-3086/11515

Authors

Anné Verhoef North-West University
Zander Janse van Rensburg North-West University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25159/2413-3086/11515

Keywords:

Gabriel Marcel, Paul Ricoeur, mind-body dualism, incarnate existence, being, embodiment

Abstract

In this article, we indicate some examples of the possible contemporary return of the mind-body dualism. Aspects of contemporary culture, like the influence of brain-computer interface (BCI) or brain-machine interface (BMI), neuroscience projects, and the popularity of sci-fi series and movies that visualise the separation of consciousness from our bodies, are discussed. Only a few of these examples are indicated as introductory to emphasise the need to think again about the importance of some of the strongest philosophical arguments against this dualism. It is in this regard that we will focus on the philosophies of Gabriel Marcel and Paul Ricoeur. Of specific concern for us in this article is Marcel’s influence on Ricoeur in his fundamental rejection of the mind-body dualism. This article’s unique contribution lies, then, in the fact that it analyses and reveals this influence of Marcel on Ricoeur, especially with regards to their shared understanding of embodied being, or incarnate existence, as opposed to a body-mind dualism. This investigation of how Marcel influenced Ricoeur provides a better understanding of: i) Ricoeur’s account of embodied being; ii) Marcel’s philosophy and concept of incarnate existence as being; and finally, iii) the importance of rejecting a mind-body dualism for our contemporary thought and living

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Bostrom, N. 2003. The Transhumanist FAQ. World Transhumanist Association. https://nickbostrom.com/views/transhumanist.pdf.

Burwell, S., M. Sample, and E. Racine. 2017. “Ethical Aspects of Brain Computer Interfaces: A Scoping Review.” BMC Medical Ethics 18 (1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0220-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-017-0220-y

Busch, T. W. 1987. The Participant Perspective: A Gabriel Marcel Reader. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Changeux, J., and R. Ricoeur. 2002. What Makes us Think? A Neuroscientist and a Philosopher Argue about Ethics, Human Nature, and the Brain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Coin, A., M. Mulder, and V. Dubljević. 2020. “Ethical Aspects of BCI Technology: What Is the State of the Art?” Philosophies 5 (31): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies5040031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies5040031

Friedrich, Orsolya, Eric Racine, Steffen Steinert, Johannes Pömsl, and Ralf J. Jox. 2021. “An Analysis of the Impact of Brain-computer Interfaces on Autonomy.” Neuroethics 14 (1): 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-018-9364-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-018-9364-9

Ihde, D. 1971. Hermeneutic Phenomenology: The Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

IMDb. 2022. “The Matrix.” IMDb. October 3, 2022. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0133093/characters/nm0915989.

Kearney, R. 2015. “The Wager of Carnal Hermeneutics.” In Carnal Hermeneutics, edited by R. Kearney and B. Treanor. New York: Fordham University Press, 15–56. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780823265916-003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5422/fordham/9780823265886.003.0001

Kearney, R. 2016. “Between Flesh and Text: Ricœur’s Carnal Hermeneutics.” In Eco-Ethica. Ethics and Environment, edited by P. Kemp and N. Hashimoto, 219–231. https://doi.org/10.5840/ecoethica2016516. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/ecoethica2016516

Keen, S. 1967. Gabriel Marcel. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press.

Kohák, E. V. 1966. “Translator’s Introduction: The Philosophy of the Will.” In Freedom and Nature: The Voluntary and the Involuntary, edited by R. Ricoeur, xi–xxxvii. Evaston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

Lee, J. 2016. “Brain Computer Interfaces and Dualism: A Problem of Brain, Mind, and Body.” AI and Society 31: 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-014-0545-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-014-0545-8

Marcel, G. 1950. The Mystery of Being: Reflection and Mystery, Vol. 1. London: The Harvill Press.

Marcel, G. 1952. Man Against Mass Society. South Bend, IN: St. Augustines Press.

Marcel, G. 1987. “The Question of Being.” In The Participant Perspective: A Gabriel Marcel Reader, edited by T. W. Busch. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Morgan, R. K. 2003. Altered Carbon: No Body Lives Forever. Great Britain: Gollancz.

Neuralink. 2021a. “Interfacing with the Brain.” https://neuralink.com/approach./.

Neuralink. 2021b. “Engineering with the Brain.” https://neuralink.com/applications/.

Ricoeur, P. 1966. Freedom and Nature: The Voluntary and the Involuntary. Translated from French by Erazim V. Kohák. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

Ricoeur, P. 1968. Entretiens Paul Ricoeur, Gabriel Marcel. Paris: Aubier-Montaigne.

Ricoeur, P. 1978. “The Unity of the Voluntary and the Involuntary as a Limiting Idea.” In The Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur: An Anthology of his Work, edited by C. E. Reagan and D. Stewart, 3–19. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Ricoeur, P., F. Azouvi, and M. B. de Launay. 1998. Critique and Conviction: Conversations with François Azouvi and Marc de Launay. New York: Columbia University Press.

Robertson, H. S. 2021. “Guest Editor’s Introduction to Technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Philosophical Dimensions.” South African Journal of Philosophy 40 (2): 121–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2021.1943899. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2021.1943899

Schwab, K. 2016. “The Fourth Industrial Revolution: What it Means, how to Respond.” World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-to-respond/.

Simms, K. 2003. Paul Ricoeur. Milton: Routledge University Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203165508. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203165508

Spiegelberg, H. 1965. The Phenomenological Movement: A Historical Introduction, 2nd edition. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7394-8_1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7394-8_1

Tallman, R. 2020. “Public Interest: EEG Implants.” In 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS): 142–146. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462191

Treanor, B. 2006. Aspects of Alterity: Levinas, Marcel and the Contemporary Debate. New York: Fordham University Press.

Verhoef, A. H., and A. Visser. 2020. “Reconsidering Freedom: Survivors of Sex Trafficking and Paul Ricoeur’s Relational Notion of Freedom.” South African Journal of Philosophy 39 (1): 22–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2019.1706381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2019.1706381